Can I legally refuse fingerprinting or facial scans when entering the U.S. and what happens if I do?
Executive summary
You cannot generally refuse CBP’s biometric collection if you are a non‑U.S. citizen seeking entry: DHS’s final rule requires facial images for most non‑citizen travelers at entry and exit effective Dec. 26, 2025, and authorizes CBP to collect additional biometrics (including fingerprints) as needed for identity verification [1] [2]. Visa applicants who refuse fingerprinting at consulates are denied because their application would be “incomplete” [3].
1. The new baseline: facial images are mandatory for most non‑citizens
DHS’s 2025 rule makes facial imagery a required part of the entry/exit process for most non‑U.S. travelers, with CBP implementing facial comparison at airports, land ports, and seaports and starting full implementation on December 26, 2025 [1] [2]. Reporting notes CBP already deploys facial comparison at dozens of locations and intends the system to speed inspections while reducing some fingerprinting steps [2] [1].
2. Refusing on arrival: practical consequences at the port of entry
Available sources show that refusal by a non‑citizen to provide required biometrics will interfere with admissibility decisions. The travel‑focused coverage and DHS rule explain CBP uses facial comparison to verify identity and may collect fingerprints if the facial match fails or an officer deems them necessary; refusing required biometrics could prevent CBP from completing identity verification and therefore bar admission [2] [1]. Specific operational guidance on what an officer will say or the precise step‑by‑step consequences for every refusal is not detailed in the cited reporting — not found in current reporting.
3. Visa applicants: refusal equals an incomplete application
The State Department’s public guidance is explicit for visa processing: a visa applicant who refuses to be fingerprinted will have the visa application denied as incomplete [3]. That establishes a clear legal consequence in the consular context distinct from the discretionary inspection at a U.S. port of entry [3].
4. Limited exceptions and medical waivers exist in some immigration settings
For certain immigration benefit processes, USCIS recognizes medical‑condition waivers to fingerprint requirements — for example, when an individual cannot provide fingerprints due to disability or skin condition — and employees are authorized to grant waivers with alternative documentation required [4]. The USCIS policy cited concerns benefit processing rather than CBP’s entry/exit inspections, and whether similar waivers apply at ports of entry is not addressed in the sources — not found in current reporting [4].
5. Agencies increasingly treat scans as non‑optional in practice
Investigative reporting on ICE and internal DHS documents indicates some agencies’ tools don’t permit individuals to decline facial scans in field encounters; 404 Media and other outlets report ICE uses apps that do not allow refusal [5]. Advocates and some lawmakers argue such practices are constitutionally problematic and raise civil‑liberties concerns, a dispute reflected in critical reporting and letters from members of Congress [6] [7] [5].
6. What authorities cite as the policy rationale — and the pushback
DHS and CBP present facial biometrics as efficient, accurate and “unobtrusive,” arguing facial comparison reduces administrative tasks and speeds traveler flow [2]. Privacy and civil‑liberties groups, plus some lawmakers, counter that government face‑recognition programs are invasive, prone to bias, and expand surveillance power; those critiques appear in reporting from the ACLU, Ars Technica, and investigative outlets [6] [7].
7. Practical traveler takeaways and limitations of current reporting
If you are a non‑U.S. citizen traveling to or departing the U.S., expect to be photographed and to have fingerprints collected where necessary; refusal risks denial of entry or other administrative denial [1] [2] [3]. For visa applicants, refusal to fingerprint leads to a denied application [3]. Detailed descriptions of the exact sequence of sanctions, appeals processes at the port, or how often CBP will accept alternative identity evidence when a traveler refuses are not provided in the available sources — not found in current reporting.
8. Where the debate will continue and what to watch next
DHS rulemaking and related proposed USCIS expansions show the government is widening biometric authorities, including broader definitions of biometrics and potential requirements for applicants and petitioners [8] [9] [10]. Watch litigation, Congressional letters, and privacy‑group challenges cited in reporting; these are the channels most likely to alter whether and how refusal options exist in practice [6] [7] [5].